Please no -Ace3- tag!

I've seen several addons under development in branches include this grotesque little tag in their TOC titles. In one case it even prefaced the actual addon name. Addon authors, please stop this ugliness!

I've seen several addons under development in branches include this grotesque little tag in their TOC titles. In one case it even prefaced the actual addon name. Addon authors, please stop this ugliness!

I don't see how this can be anything other than a recommendation by the Ace3 team - along with a good description of why you don't like it. It's after all entirely up to authors how they want to name their addons.

I don't see how this can be anything other than a recommendation by the Ace3 team - along with a good description of why you don't like it. It's after all entirely up to authors how they want to name their addons.

We don't want the Ace3 branding. Simple as that. Ace3 is not magic sauce that make your addons better.

I might see labeling a dev version of a mod that has different frameworks (Recount with Ace2/Ace3), but the public versions should never be labled. By extension, this means that anything in /trunk is a "public version" and should have no labels. Only versions hosted in /branches because mostly developers/testers go there and might need the framework infomation.

Edit: And yes you could look at libs folders or the toc file... but sometimes its easier to just look at the addon screen :P

I might see labeling a dev version of a mod that has different frameworks (Recount with Ace2/Ace3), but the public versions should never be labled. By extension, this means that anything in /trunk is a "public version" and should have no labels. Only versions hosted in /branches because mostly developers/testers go there and might need the framework infomation.

Edit: And yes you could look at libs folders or the toc file... but sometimes its easier to just look at the addon screen :P

There is absolutely no reason to brand something as Ace3 in the TOC, if a developer wants to know it's Ace3 they're smart enough to look for a "libs" folder and see if it contains Ace*-3.0.

It's not easier, it's stupid and it leads us to mis-information being spread, it'll take you 5 seconds to look in the lib folder and figure it out.

[edit] There is very little reason for anyone even a developer to know the library used, if something breaks you get a stace trace that already tells you the library, if you want to modify it you're already in the Lua files anyway so checking the libs/ folder isn't that complicated.

Wrong, it's on the WoWAce SVN. Nothing stops a rule from being created that you aren't allowed to have addons up with an Ace3 branding.

Wow... that seems like a major over-reaction to something as stupid as 6 characters in one file of an addon. I know you all hate branding, but I hope that nobody is actually going to put that kind of a rule in place.

What's more, you don't even need to look in the libs folder. There's at least three places in the TOC where you can see if the addon uses Ace3: OptionalDeps, X-Embeds, and the includes themselves. Putting -Ace3- in the title is useless branding, and since it tends to be colored, its even more than just 6 chars, 18 in total. Counting the preceding space, 19.

I myself prefer Ace mods, but only because its pretty close to a guarantee that they'll share the same config style: FuBar and Dewdrop.

Wow... that seems like a major over-reaction to something as stupid as 6 characters in one file of an addon. I know you all hate branding, but I hope that nobody is actually going to put that kind of a rule in place.

If you've ever read through the forums both WoWAce and the UI & Macros, you'd realize what kind of poor information is spread when you let people consider a library a brand that makes it better.

It's already discouraged that mods on the svn have Ace in their name. But this not about what the mod is called - it's about it being *BRANDED* in the toc file. So that when you look at the addon selection screen you'd see this: